Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:dean1484 said:I have a different take on this whole thing. First off we need to define what "Standing the test of time" means.
Google was helpful and defined it as: "To remain useful or valued over a long period of time; to last a long time. "
That has me going Hummmm.. . . . Most of the cars proposed in this thread are certainly valued but are they still useful? And that begs me to ask Useful at what? As being a car that can be used in the modern sense? Most older cars are not very useful if you use that definition. Cool? Absolutely!!! But useful? That made me ponder things.
I think saying a car is has stood the test of time can be applied to a specific element of a car. Take the Jag Collin posted up. The body design of that car has absolutely stood the test of time. I mean I would by a modern car that looked like that today. The driveline on the other hand not so much. I realize that this is extremely subjective. But with all the cars people has posted up I would argue that many have not stood the test of time. They are many "cool cars" There are many cars that "set the bar" for something at that period in time. Many could even be considered "Iconic". But if a car has to be "useful or valued over a long period of time" that weeds out many of them.
I think an easier better standard for cars to meet is if they are Iconic. Cars that for some reason made a statement or were unique or cutting edge or moved the bar in some aspect of automotive design.
The problem is that many cars that I would like to say have stood the test of time really have not. They are cool cars (take the 944 or the first jen rx7) and they are both Iconic and really cool but they really have not stood the test of time.
In a weird way my current DD, a 9 year old Mercedes I think at the moment you could say it has stood the test of time. It was the first year of the last design. It still performs as good or better than most modern cars. It still is useful (I drive it every day for work) and it is as useful as any modern awd sedan on the market today. It even looks current and could be mistaken as a much newer car. So at the moment my car has stood the test of time very well. BUT I bet in another 5 years things will be different. Mercedes will probably be on to another generation of design and the ground pounding V8 will now be looked at with distain as the modern cars will have some form of electric propulsion that will probably greatly surpass its performance. It will probably be safer and generally easier to drive. At that point my car will not have stood the test of time. So this leads me to another question with "standing the test of time" How much time defines standing the test of time?
Anyway I have rambled on long enough. I thought it was an interesting thing to ponder and take a deeper dive into what is the definition of and what is the litmus test that a car has to meet to be considered to have stood the test of time.
I appreciate your literal input, but I think the timbre of the discussion was simply design-related. Which cars' appearance and visual design has endured. I linked to a DB4 and a MkIII Triumph. Neither of those have any practicality, reliability, nor real-world drivability, but I think the appearance of those cars is just as sexy now as it was then.
I understood the implication of the post to be "what looked good then, what still looks good now."
So to extrapolate from the definition you found: To remain useful or valued over a long period of time, I don't think that we're talking about the practical, reliable, or functional use of the vehicle itself, we're discussing the aesthetic of the vehicle's appearance. "Useful" in this context means, "does it still make our hootus tingle," not "will it be a practical choice for a DD."
We're not asking if the CAR remains useful, we're asking if the ART still plays to our hearts.
You are not wrong if you make all the assumptions that you are reading into Colin's post. The problem I have is that generally most of the cars that may get people all hot and bothered are just old cars that really have not stood the test of time. Even more interesting is that if you went back to the 1990's it would be a very different story. Many of them would still have relevant design ques. And to your point yes they are all still "Art" Every car could be considered art.
I think you are reading a lot into the original post that really is not there. When something stands the test of time it is about the highest praise you can bestow on something. I think it has become an overused term that has resulted in its meaning becoming watered down over time and has become just another way of saying that is a cool car that makes your bits tingle. I think that the term has become interchangeable with the term "Iconic" or even "Cool". And that is ok I guess but In my opinion, there are few if any cars that stand the test of time and those that do at a given date and time may not a decade later. Whereas an Iconic car will always be just that.
Some cars are even weirder with respect to standing the test of time. Take the Pontiac Astec. It was about the weirdest and ugliest car when it was introduced and yet if you see one on the road today the design actually looks current. So it was ahead of its time we just did not know it then and now you could argue that it has stood the test of time better than virtually any car.
This is interesting to debate/discuss. I don't think I am being literal. Overly Critical? Maybe. I am looking at context and to some degree looking at how a word or phrase used to describe things (in this case cars) has morphed into a different meaning to some people. It does not make them wrong it is just an interesting thing.
I think that 60s Italian front engined super cars had shapes that still resonate with car nuts - Ferrari Daytona, Maserati Ghibli and Lamborghini Islero.
BTW, just what is everyone definition of stands the test of time?
noddaz said:
BTW, just what is everyone definition of stands the test of time?
I would say that definitly has!!!!
To me it's always been a full size GM or Ford truck. They still look and function just like trucks. You can also do pretty much anything you can dream of to one due to a huge aftermarket. You can make them modern, fast, rat rod, towing beasts, luxo barges, lowriders, cruisers, drag racers.... the only thing they don't really accel at is road racing, but you can do a lot better with well thought out mods there too.
I'm kind of disappointed in myself for not getting one ever.
You'll need to log in to post.
